non competition

[toe_tickler]

I resigned from an associate position a few months ago. I have a fairly specific question and wonder if anyone one else out there has any insight or experience. As an aside, I have approached my attorney for legal advice, but was curious if anyone has had a similar experience. I do reside in a state where non-competes hold in court.

My non-compete lists not only the single practice location, but also two hospitals I had privileges at. Some of my peers have indicated that including a hospital in the non-compete would not hold out in court because I was never formally employed by said hospital. Any insight on this issue?

I was employed for a few years and unfortunately this practice simply was not busy enough to handle more than one provider. Unfortunately, I am now back at square one, now with a non-competition clause, and family residing in the area.

Thank you

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[bunNfxr]

The answers vary based on case law in your state/ area. Best bet is to come to a reasonable agreement with the practice you left. If they are unreasonable then your next option is a commute to the next closest town.
What usually makes a non compete clause viable, is that the restrictions demonstrably protect the entities interests. They will usually be deemed unreasonable if they are aimed at damaging the departing employee. If they cannot show how retaining privileges at the hospital could possibly interfere with their interests, then the non compete would not hold up. The other issue sometimes considered is whether patient care is better served by your retaining those hospital privileges. So if you are practicing outside the non-compete restrictions, and it would be a hardship to send those patients to another facility, then the non compete might be deemed unreasonable and therefore null and void. The last consideration is that some states will null and void an entire non-compete clause, if any portion of the agreement is not enforceable.
However, unless you are made out of money and want to make sure the local lawyers and courts are well funded by your excessive bales of cash, you should avoid ever going to court over such issues. Everyone will loose except the lawyers.

 

[dtrack22]

Even if someone were in a similar position as you, non compete laws can vary quite a bit from state to state. I'm not sure its something that anyone here is going to be able to help you with. What's the buy out on the non compete? If there isn't one, in some states, that makes the whole thing invalid.

I haven't had to test a non compete yet. I believe the mileage on mine would be found to be unreasonable. The problem, as bunfxr mentioned, is the cost to fight a non compete probably isn't worth it unless it's egregious enough or in violation of state law that all it takes is a letter from an attorney to get the employer to drop it.

 

[ExperiencedDPM]

Bunfxr makes some excellent points. As he stated, in order for a non compete to be valid, the practice has to prove that there will be harm, usually financial.

I have been involved with reviewing many of these cases over the years. I am not an attorney but have worked with many on this issue. I have seen most non compete agreements UPHELD. And I have NEVER seen a restrictive agreement upheld regarding hospital privileges. The practice has no financial interest in the hospital and they don’t own the hosptial. The agreement would likely be upheld that you couldn’t solicit or even accept consults from doctors who referred to the practice. But you taking your patient to that hospital for surgery has no financial impact on the practice.

Bottom line is that you should have no issues taking cases to those hospitals. Accepting consults or referrals from docs who used to send to the practice can be an issue.